Concerns about whooping cough vaccine during pregnancy! Help!

Just to be clear it isn't myself who is pregnant it is my eldest daughter.....and although I am way toooo young to be a granny

she is expecting my
second grandchild.

She came back from a hospital appointment today and rung me to tell me that she was told that she will need to receive a vaccination against whooping
cough. I couldn't understand why as she received all of her scheduled vaccinations as a child. She informed me that the vaccine wasn't for her
protection as such but so that her unborn child would be exposed to the vaccine and thus have some immunity before he/she is even born.
She was told it's a big problem and that the last couple of years that a lot of babies had caught whooping cough before they are normally scheduled to
start at 2months old.

My youngest children are 6 years old now I have never had any experience with this vaccine but because of the things she knows I am interested in she
asked me if I would research it a bit for her. I honestly don't know what to say to her??

Apparently.... the vaccine they use isn't just for whooping cough as a single vaccine for this isn't on the market but they give a combination vaccine
against diphtheria, tetanus, AND whooping cough. She wasn't told this. As far as I can see this vaccine as never been tested on pregnant women and
there is no clinical trial data outlining the safety of using this vaccine while pregnant.

And also....the big push in the UK is to advise women that although there is no clinical data relating to using this vaccine during pregnancy that
they have been using this vaccine in women in the US safely and effectively for the last couple of years.....so don't worry!
But as far as I can see the vaccine they use in the US isn't even the same vaccine used in the UK!

I'm just wondering if anybody knows any information both in the US and the UK regarding this vaccine? She as asked for my help and as this is a very
serious issue I'm feeling the burden to be as very well informed as I can!

MegaManXMan
If you sincerely care for your daughter and grand daughter's health and well being, please consult a proper healthcare professional about this
vaccine, not some strangers on a conspiracy website.

Agree there are to many wacka doodles on here that will give you new age health advice crap and psudo scientific articals that twist the facts.

As the above said go to a REAL doctor or better yet 2.

Unfortunatly woophing cough is one of the few vaccines I havent been involved with so I wont dare comment.

If you knew me you would know I don't take advice off strangers and rarely take it from friends either! lol .....but there is a great lacking of
information on the subject. I asked if anyone had any information on the subject so that it might help as starting points to research it better. As I
was suggesting in my post the official information given by health professionals in the UK is a bit sketchy at best and therefore it would be better
to be a bit more informed prior to any discussions with a health professional.
Sometimes without doing a little research it is difficult to even know the right questions to ask. Honestly please dont confuse me with individuals
who take on board everything that is thrown at them on here...because that is not me!

Its just Im not sure I can publicaly publish them on here as they are from paid for journals and not in the free public doman so not sure were that
stands T&C wise as posting them onlines sort of a copyright breach I think

Hi my instinct says DON'T LET HER, but common sense says I am not an immunologist or neonatal practitioner. Ok I got all that off my chest, I'll
share info from this article in the Encyclopedia Britannica:

If they are not concerned for her immunity, according to this, they should not be concerned for the baby's:

What is transferred across the placenta in many species is a fair sample of the mother's antibodies. How this happens depends on the structure of the
placenta, which varies among species. In humans maternal IgG antibodies—but not those of the other immunoglobulin classes—are transported across
the placenta into the fetal bloodstream throughout the second two-thirds of pregnancy.

And if she plans to breast feed:

The early milk (colostrum) is very rich in antibodies—mainly IgA but also some IgM and IgG—and during the first few days of life the newborn
mammal can absorb these proteins intact from the digestive tract directly into the bloodstream.

After a newborn has received its supply of maternal antibodies, it is as fully protected as its mother.

It goes on to mention some doctors recommending the pregnant woman get a tetanus booster (although, how many newborns step on a rusty nail?)

This sentence raised my eyebrow:

The active immunization of pregnant women against certain viral diseases, such as rubella [German measles], must be avoided, however, because the
immunizing agent can cross the placenta and produce severe fetal complications.

It goes on to mention some doctors recommending the pregnant woman get a tetanus booster (although, how many newborns step on a rusty nail?)

Actually, tetanus doesn't really have anything to do with rusty nails, other than that they're sharp and likely dirty and tend to cause puncture
wounds.

Your best bet for getting tetanus is to cut your foot and step in cow poo. However, you can get it from a variety of other means, and one is from the
umbilical stump. If Mom has no tetanus immunity, she doesn't pass it on to the baby passively prior to birth. The kid can then get tetanus from the
umbilical cord stump, if he's exposed to spores. This tends to happen more to kids born at home, because the dog and/or cat can carry tetanus and not
have an active infection. So, for that matter, can ag workers. It's not unusual for farmers to harbor the bacteria for it, sort of like people
carrying MRSA around in their nostrils.

If Mom is given DTAP, then she'll pass along a temporary immunity to tetanus to the kid, good enough to get them past the umbilicus healing.

You brought up one of the things I was thinking about myself....my daughter does plan to breast feed. But I'm not sure if the course of vaccines she
was given as a child covers her now as an adult and as such if the antibodies would be passed on in breastmilk...I have a lot of researching to do!

I don't personally know of anybody who as had whooping cough....apart from myself, as my parents decided against giving me the vaccine, and that kind
of didn't work out too well! So I am mindful of this....

I just need to find out as much information as possible...ultimately it is her choice...I just want to be able to assist her in making the right one
for her which she is comfortable and happy with!

Sure... good luck finding a reputable health care provider who isn't in the bag for BIG PHARMA.

It's probably not as difficult as finding an anti-vaxxer who actually understands science and medicine though.....

I've had a good look around for anything that would make me question giving this to any of my family and I'm struggling.
As has been said though, speak with your daughter's maternity unit. They'll have more experience with it than anyone on here.

Hi my instinct says DON'T LET HER, but common sense says I am not an immunologist or neonatal practitioner. Ok I got all that off my chest, I'll
share info from this article in the Encyclopedia Britannica:

If they are not concerned for her immunity, according to this, they should not be concerned for the baby's:

After a newborn has received its supply of maternal antibodies, it is as fully protected as its mother.

That's just one source, but a good one. The truth is out there-- you will help her make the right decision.

Thankfully medicine isn't driven by instinct but by tried and tested scientific method.

I would also suggest that if you're going to give "information" include ALL of the relevant information and don't cherry-pick. In the article you
cited you neglected to quote probably THE most important part of it which is this:

"As important as the passively transferred maternal antibodies are, their effects are only temporary. The maternal antibodies in the blood
become diluted as the animal grows; moreover, they gradually succumb to normal metabolic breakdown. Because the active development of acquired
immunity is a slow and gradual process, young mammals actually become more susceptible to infection during their early stages of growth than they are
immediately after birth."

Hence the rationale for vaccination.

Did that paragraph just slip you by?
Did you think it wasn't very important? Or did you just ignore it completely for a reason?

I know which answer my money's on.

Yes OP, the truth is indeed out there but there are some people who wish to hide it from you.

I have worked in healthcare for years, and can tell you that if you want an unbiased opinion, your doctor is the last person you should talk to.

It is a choice, don't let her get bullied into it.

I won't do any cut and pasting from various sources, since the vaccine supporters seem to be out in force tonight. But here are some things I found
that you may want to read, and then form your own opinion.

Bottom line, is what does your daughter think? She should research herself too and determine what she thinks is best for her baby. Personally, I
have NEVER taken a flu shot and never will. I worked in an ER during the swine flu outbreak and whooping cough and I fully believe the 'vaccines'
helped spread it, especially the nasal sprays. I would NEVER take any type of vaccine while pregnant. Why take the risk? I didn't even drink
caffeine or take Tylenol for fear of harming my babies, why would I put toxins and other unknowns that could potentially harm them?

Safety and efficacy in pregnant women is one area of vaccines that I am woefully uninformed about, so I'm not going to try to make an argument
whether your daughter should or should not get the vaccine, other than to simply say that I'm inclined to take the word of the doctor quite
strongly.

That said, I just want to point something out. The reason this is even an issue, the reason her baby is at an increased risk of whooping cough, is
very simple:

Anti-vaxxers are are scaring parents into avoiding safe and beneficial vaccines for their children, which is increasing the pools of those who can be
infected and creating whooping cough outbreaks in many locations across the US and in various parts of Europe. There are innocent babies born to
parents who fully intend to vaccinate them as soon as they are old enough who are DYING because of OTHER PARENTS who refuse to vaccinate their
children.

By destroying heard immunity (basically a certain percentage of the population needs to be vaccinated to prevent outbreaks and thus keep the very
young and those who cannot receive vaccines for health reasons), anti-vaxxers are endangering the health of your future grandchild.

For example, the area in California that was hardest hit in 2010 had a study done that showed 80% of those infected with whooping cough were CURRENT
on the whooping cough vaccine. So to say that parents not wanting to vaccinate their kids are responsible for the recent whooping cough outbreak is
gross misstatement.

I am sick of people saying this. I got whooping cough a year and a half ago. Guess what? I had just had a TDAP less than a year before. People
getting the vaccine thought they were immune, so even when they became symptomatic they kept exposing others and spreading it, because they didn't
think they could get it!

There are finally studies emerging that indicate a new strain is out there that the current vaccine doesn't work against. DUH...I knew this over a
year ago, because it was very obvious to me here in Washington State.

I just get sick of the propaganda. If the vaccine isn't working, than giving people a false sense of security is not doing anyone any good. They
need to admit to the problem...the booster is NOT working.

For example, the area in California that was hardest hit in 2010 had a study done that showed 80% of those infected with whooping cough were CURRENT
on the whooping cough vaccine. So to say that parents not wanting to vaccinate their kids are responsible for the recent whooping cough outbreak is
gross misstatement.

I am sick of people saying this. I got whooping cough a year and a half ago. Guess what? I had just had a TDAP less than a year before. People
getting the vaccine thought they were immune, so even when they became symptomatic they kept exposing others and spreading it, because they didn't
think they could get it!

There are finally studies emerging that indicate a new strain is out there that the current vaccine doesn't work against. DUH...I knew this over a
year ago, because it was very obvious to me here in Washington State.

I just get sick of the propaganda. If the vaccine isn't working, than giving people a false sense of security is not doing anyone any good. They
need to admit to the problem...the booster is NOT working.

I'm afraid he isn't wrong at all.
The tenet of herd immunity is probably even more relevant in this case.

You wrote "So to say that parents not wanting to vaccinate their kids are responsible for the recent whooping cough outbreak is gross
misstatement."
Did you actually read what you wrote?
Do you understand what you're saying?
Who do you think propagates disease, vaccinated or unvaccinated?
If you believe it's the former I suggest you go back to school.

Hi my instinct says DON'T LET HER, but common sense says I am not an immunologist or neonatal practitioner. Ok I got all that off my chest, I'll
share info from this article in the Encyclopedia Britannica:

If they are not concerned for her immunity, according to this, they should not be concerned for the baby's:

After a newborn has received its supply of maternal antibodies, it is as fully protected as its mother.

That's just one source, but a good one. The truth is out there-- you will help her make the right decision.

Thankfully medicine isn't driven by instinct but by tried and tested scientific method.

I would also suggest that if you're going to give "information" include ALL of the relevant information and don't cherry-pick. In the article you
cited you neglected to quote probably THE most important part of it which is this:

"As important as the passively transferred maternal antibodies are, their effects are only temporary. The maternal antibodies in the blood
become diluted as the animal grows; moreover, they gradually succumb to normal metabolic breakdown. Because the active development of acquired
immunity is a slow and gradual process, young mammals actually become more susceptible to infection during their early stages of growth than they are
immediately after birth."

Hence the rationale for vaccination.

Did that paragraph just slip you by?
Did you think it wasn't very important? Or did you just ignore it completely for a reason?

I know which answer my money's on.

Yes OP, the truth is indeed out there but there are some people who wish to hide it from you.

You can decide for yourself the most important points, as can the OP, which is why I posted a link. What I found to be the most important part is that
the passive transfer in utero followed by breast feeding provides full immunity to whatever the mother is immune to. This is nature at its finest. Did
you miss the part about the vaccine agents passing the placental barrier?

And btw, I tend to believe that medicine is driven by neither instinct nor loyalty to the scientific method, but rather greed.

I only wish to share what strikes me as the most important points, as do you. I accept you believe differently. Perhaps together our posts provide a
more rounded take. Still, OP, these are our OPINIONS and neither I nor Logos23 would bid you stake a newborn's life on what we type here. That much
Logos23 and I can agree on I am sure!

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.